Online Inductance Identification of Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motors Independent of Rotor Position Information
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn the paper under review, the authors presented the results of research on their proposed online inductance identification method of a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor (PMSM). In general, the problem considered by the authors is not new. Many researchers have worked on its solution. However, the authors proposed new ideas, in particular the definition of parametric equations for identifying inductance without using information about the rotor position. Moreover, as research has shown, the proposed method can be implemented within only 0.2 s. In this regard, I would like to note the high relevance and important practical significance of the research presented in this paper.
The research was carried out using the method of mathematical description, simulation and experimental study on a specially created experimental setup.
In the Introduction and literature review, the prerequisites for conducting research are considered in sufficient detail, the relevance of the study is explained, the purpose and contributions are formulated, and a critical analysis of studies previously published by other authors is given. In the main parts of the paper, based on the well-known mathematical description of PMSM, the authors proposed their method for identifying inductance. An analysis of the identification accuracy was carried out, and the results of verification of theoretical conclusions using experimental studies on a laboratory setup were presented.
I extremely rarely write reviews without comments, but this is precisely the case when I have no significant shortcomings on the presented paper. I enjoyed reading this paper.
In general, the presented paper will be of interest to scientists and researchers, specialists in the field of electrical machines. I would like to thank the authors for the quality research and congratulate the authors on a well-prepared article. I recommend this article for publication in its present form.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for your patience and hard work in the review process. It is our honor to receive your recognition. We will try our best to improve our manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors, I have a major issue concerning lines 427-428, where you write: “ the actual rotor position and speed from the preassembled resolver will be used in the field oriented control of the motor in this part”. Actually, in a sensorless application you do not have the resolver, and in the FOC you have to use your estimates of position and speed. How does Fig. 13 change if you do not use the preassembled resolver, but you use your estimates of position and speed? Please, add some new experiments where you do not use the preassembled resolver, because such new experiments give a measure of the robustness of your method.
I have 2 other very minor issues:
--- lines 71-73: “The traditional solution is regarding the estimated position as the actual rotor position, then the above methods are available [20].” This sentence is not clear. What does it mean “The traditional solution is concerning the estimated position as the actual rotor position, then the above methods are available [20].”?
--- Caption of Fig. 14 b: please, explain better the two cases “identification results, test results”
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript describes a method for the online inductance identification of PMSMs, in which the rotor position knowledge is not needed.
The paper is well written and structured, including a state of the art on the subject, the theoretical development of the method, some simulations and tests results.
No requests of corrections or modifications.
However, it would be fine to add some considerations and possibly some simulations and experimental results about dynamic behaviour, for example if a torque step occurs, both with increasing and decreasing torque reference value.
Author Response
Thank you for your patience and hard work in the review process. We have conducted some experiments about the dynamic behavior of the proposed inductance identification method. However, the performance is not as good as that under steady states. We are sorry that the related research work can not be completed in a short time. We will keep trying to improve the dynamic characteristics of the online inductance identification method and present the research results in our later manuscripts.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
It was a pleasure to review your paper. Find below some observations regarding it:
1. You should better shape your paper to fit the journal's profile.
2. The introduction (state-of-the-art) is comprehensive. The references are recent and their number is suitable. They should be more deeply included within the paper text and compared more in detail.
3. The theoretical description of the proposed method is confusing. A general workflow should be needed which could be used also in an industrial environment. It is not clear how the position information is estimated. Seemly, the method needs two unknown values: that of the PM's flux and the stator resistance. These also should be determined automatically to have an overall estimation method to be applied practically.
4. It is very important for the engineering community to replicate (check) your work. Therefore, more details on the experimental setup should be also added to the paper (measurement equipment's type and precision, etc.). Also, the way the acquired and plotted results were obtained should be detailed. You should add also more details concerning the way the estimation algorithm was implemented.
5. "And it is quite suitable for fault detection and fault tolerant control of traction motors in electric vehicles": this could be a link to the journal's profile, but you should explain it in more detail.
6. Some minor formal corrections are required:
- the quality of the figures should be improved (especially that of the texts on them);
- the newton meter should be abbreviated as N·m, by using a center dot to separate compound units and not a simple dot;
- use a nonbreaking space between quantities and measurement units.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPositive:
- The central theme of the paper is clearly recognizable
- The structure of the content is very successful
- The underlying idea is promising and well described
- The validation of the model with a measurement in the laboratory is very successful
Negative:
- Minor spelling mistakes
- The illustrations are of poor quality and should be embedded in higher resolution
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
For me, as a non-native speaker, the English is very easy to understand. However, there are minor spelling mistakes that need to be corrected (e.g. in Figure 1: defination instead of definition).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
